Thank you. Still are, but we're going to get started. And Cheryl, what do you got for us? Okay, we're going to start. Chair, the chair's here. Chair's here. There you go. So we get to pass the gavel already. Slow down. Okay, we're going to be on page one. We're going to be looking at the first plan is FRP 2429 Lexmark International. Sorry, I still can't get this right. Lexmark International, Section 1, Lot 7. This property is located, here's Loudon Avenue, Setzer Way. Setzer Way runs into Freight Boulevard up over to Newtown. Lexmark is in this area here. This is one lot, lot seven in that area that development we'll see a development plan later but this lot they're subdividing this one lot into four lots. So with that we have our typical sign offs, engineering traffic, landscape addressing, Forester, environmental quality, bike ped, addition of utilities, to note that this property shall be developed in accordance with the approved final development plan. Like I said we will have a development plan following with this documentation for water quality post office then we had quite a few cleanup conditions as you can see addition of site statistics street cross sections utilities along sets away name and address of property owner developer addition of private utility list correct owner certification engineer certification urban county engineer certification correct planning commission certification some of them needed to be added and some just need to be corrected denote number one duplicate additional notes from previous plan because this sets your way at this current time is a private road private street and I know that I believe it's banks engineering is working to get it dedicated to make it a public street but at this current time it's still private street so that's you can see there the last condition discussed dedication of Setzer Way so we had several other this is in the Royal Springs aquifer so we need to have that go through that process to be reviewed also with that I'll open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions. Cheryl, I think in TRC water quality said one of those proposed lots may or may not have sewer to it. Okay all right I'll let Miss Abby Jones speak to that one. Hello there I'll mention that our buyer bought the property two days before the filing deadline and these are the original conditions we did not get our comments or updated plans in on Tuesday we had a chance to drop off those updated plans yesterday so we don't have the revised conditions on that but we have made substantial edits but I think that's why there was some confusion about some of the ownership because the PVA did not have the correct information at the time that we were submitting everything we got a deed that had been filed we've worked on these different items we've moved the property line so that everybody has access to the existing sanitary sewer easements so we do have that taken care of and we've we've talked about the vast majority of these with staff so and again we've we've turned in an updated plat for them we just don't have those revised conditions because we were not able to get those taken care of as of Tuesday so if you have any specific questions I'm glad to address them though any questions for the applicant this is a basic nosy as uses for that property well the building on lot 7a will become the new churchill mcgee headquarters so a contracting business okay and then in the rear they're anticipating leasing to their subs so the different on that'd be C will be like drywallers and plumbers and stuff like that in storefront with a roll-up door and some different they're not roll up doors on just one end I think and then in the rear is where they anticipate keeping like their cherry pickers and things like that okay I'm just curious because I think that's very close to the Hope Center am I right about that oh it's um it's surrounded on two sides by the Hope Center and also the railroad I I could point out the homeless encampments if you'd like. Yeah, I was concerned. Occasionally, that's one of my cut-throughs, and I know they have a lot of pedestrian traffic out there as people walk back and forth. Yes. And just was curious about what volume of traffic you were anticipating. We can talk more about it when we get to the development plan. I think that would make it make more sense with the buildings, and the buildings have been tweaked a little bit. We've simplified things greatly from the original idea. because everything just went down very quickly when somebody buys peace property and says, can you make this happen on Monday? So we've simplified and been able to get all of the information for the, I think, 15 existing easements on the property. Okay, thank you. Sorry, so dedication of Seltzer, why is it public street? We don't, my client doesn't own it. Banks is working on it. Banks is working on it. My client is in favor of it becoming public. And my understanding is that it's in process, but we're not in charge of that process because we don't own that land. That's a different owner for that land. Okay. Any additional questions? Did everybody ask their questions of staff as well? I know we kind of went right to it. Okay, thank you. All right. Any public comment? Madam Chair, if you're ready. Yes. I think it's appropriate to stay with postponement at this time. I'll move for recommendation postponement plan FRP 24-29 Lexmark with the 33 conditions. Second. It's been moving second. Any questions in motion? All in favor? Aye. Okay, he knows. Thank you. All right, we're going to move forward. Our first development plan, MJDP 2458 Ramsey Sullivan property, lot 1. This is located out Georgetown Road. Georgetown Road is out here at the front part of the subdivision of Kearney Ridge. This is the interstate, I-7564 exchange coming through here. We have railroad here. This is an apartment complex in the rear portion of the Ramsey-Sullivan property off of Kearney Ridge. What they're coming into today is to depict an increase of the square footage for the clubhouse, which is located in the center of the property along with the pool. So they're doing some improvements with the clubhouse only. So with that, we have our typical sign-offs, engineering address, Forrester, Bike and Ped, building inspection asks for a new note to be added to the plans all buildings paving signs fences they need to make sure that they go through building inspection for those a couple cleanup conditions addition of record plot information dimensions for driveways walkways height the clubhouse and feet addition of tree preservation plan revised plan title to match staff report and denote review by the Royal Springs aquifer again this is in the Royal Springs aquifer area so if there's any other questions questions for staff applicant good morning Rory Kaley the partners yeah just a bigger clubhouse it has been to the Royal Springs aquifer with the first certification we have that note on there and we have the tree preservation plan on there as well otherwise everything's just kind of little cleanup stuff came up came up yesterday Sullivan's trace extension do you know where that stands? Mr. Barlow is supposed to be getting that done within the next month or so. I believe he's got another business out there. That's what our client's been told from them. The notes on the plan, I think we get four COs to the structures before that access point that he's building has to be completed. That sounds right. So he's got his building permits. He's been out there. He's got several structures underway so yeah he's pushing mr. Barlow to connect okay I believe that yeah all right any other questions no thank you thank you public comment Okay. Is this your turn? Madam Chair, I move for approval appeal in MJDP 2458, Ramsey Sullivan, property lot 1, with the attached 11 conditions. Second. Okay, it's been a move and a second. All in favor? Aye. You name us? All right, moving right along. Okay, our next development plan is Piper property, lot four. You will see there are revised conditions for this. You should have a copy of revised conditions. Okay, this property is located, this is Pasadena. We have Nicholas Field Road out this way. This is Pasadena Regency Dentist Drive. It's located here off of Dentist Drive in the back. They are proposing a medical office, and this is in the B1 zone, so the building had to be pulled up to the front of the property. So that's why we have revised conditions, because we pulled the building up forwards. So with that we have our typical sign-offs, engineering, traffic, landscaping, addressing, forest or environmental quality, bike and peg, green space, fire, waste management, division of water quality, United States Post Office, the building inspection note for all buildings and paving. We just still had a few cleanup conditions, remove crosshatch lines from buildings it just makes it a little harder to read sometimes correct plan title to match staff report correct plan type to amended final development plan add existing topography information at two foot intervals and remove proposed contours denote location for construction vehicles depict recorded easements and remove service lines we like to see just the easement itself the boundaries of the easement not the line itself on the plans addition of all street cross sections and locations on plan face denote new site statistics box and complete information for lot 4 with vegetated open space required and provided we have a new site statistics box that we've started using you can see up here at the top that way it makes it more uniform for everybody so as our plans come through we're trying to go to one box to make sure that we have all the same information document account with Lynn imaging this is so that we can have reproduction reproduction of the final plans for our office as far as a copy for us and then for to be distributed to a couple other governmental agencies and so with that I'll open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions questions for staff not a little bit from the applicant Good morning. Good morning. Yeah, I don't have any comments. Could you state your name? My name is Steve Leesman. And you're with? Leesman Engineering. Okay. Any questions for the applicant? I've got one. Thanks for the revisions and cleanup. The staff had one that they've now removed. I don't know if it necessarily got mentioned, but 34 proposed use on the property and horse trailer parking. Obviously, Animal Eye Clinic, is that correct? Would that be there? I'll have the editor come up and explain how his business works to you. Okay. We need to mark you sir. Yeah, we just need to have the at the microphone if you're going to talk Okay, on the old plan we had a we had a u-shaped driveway coming in and we had on the when the building was in the back so what we did is we had a u-shaped driver and we had horse trailer parking across the front of the parking lot so that's why they took it off what we're doing now is we're coming around the back of the building and on the left site left side of the plan over there there's a driveway where the horse trailer can pull in and then back in next to the building okay okay yeah so this is a small animal veterinary ophthalmology practice 98% of our Our clientele is cats and dogs, 2% equine, and a majority of equine business we do barn calls for. There are some specific surgeries that we have to do at the facility or procedures, really, that a client will bring their trailer into our property, unload the horse. Okay. Is it a complete veterinary practice or just dedicated to eyes? Just eyes. Okay. And I'm sorry, sir. Could you just introduce yourself? My name is Joey Percival. Thank you. I'm sorry. Curious. Yeah. I'm in an equine world, so. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. And I'm in the small cats and dogs world, and the last time I had to have a cat treated, we had to go to Cincinnati, so I'm glad to see you here. Was that our practice in Cincinnati? I don't intend, but it was. All right. Great. Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you. Great. Thank you, sir. Thank you, everybody. Appreciate it. You're welcome. Any public comment? Okay. Madam Chair, I'll move for recommendation of approval in JDP 2459 Piper Properties with the now revised 22 conditions. Second. Been moving a second. All in favor? Aye. Okay, our next one is, next development plan is PLN MJDP 2460 High Acres Shopping Center, Track 1, amended. Again, you have a copy of revised conditions for this plan. Okay, this property is located off of Bryan Station Road and St. Anthony Drive. What we're looking at is track one here at the corner They're wanting to add additional building square footage in this area here So they came in with an amendment to the development plan So with the revisions we still have our typical sign-offs engineering traffic landscape addressing forester environmental quality like pen green space fire waste management water quality US Postal Service then we had just a couple cleanup conditions delete note number 10 it's a duplication we have two of the same notes in there to pick location of street cross sections on face that's just showing they have the street cross sections here on the plan but we like to see where they're located on the street because sometimes they change as you go down the street so we just want that on there addition of zone to zone landscape screening and buffer on the article 18 of the zoning ordinance this property is located it's a commercial zone located next to a residential zone so we wanted to make sure that we have the correct buffer along that addition of total column in our site statistics box then we had three discussion questions discuss requirements of articles 16 18 and 20 those are new about parking landscaping and open space discuss location proposed building on lot 3 this is the the B1 zone and therefore with the 20-foot building line this structure should be up closer to the zone line and then discuss proposed drive-through on lot three again the drive-through right here adjacent and in between the Bryan Station Road and the structure is not permitted so we had a couple discussion questions on those so with that I know I discussed some things with the applicant he can go a little bit further into what they plan to do to meet some of these discussion questions if you all have any other comments or questions for me real quick uh cheryl discuss location proposed building on lot three you said it's not as close enough to the road right and that's it's for the b1 zone it's minimum of five maximum of 20 so this is too far away but after talking with him shortly before the meeting he's going to talk to you about location of that building three okay the revisions that they are proposing on that Okay, isn't this an existing building? No, it's not. It's a proposed. It's vacant right now. It's proposed. It's vacant now. Okay, thank you. Okay. Applicant. Good morning. Chris Mitchell, Palmer Engineering. Yes, I've been working with staff on the comments, and regarding the building on Lot 3, my client has decided to no longer show on the DP, so we're going to be removing that on the development plan. It's not a priority for them this time. the expansion on track one is and there's some other complications regarding open space requirements and and such that we want to they want to focus on the improvement to track one so we'll be making that change after today to remove that from so lot three won't have any changes going forward at this point any comments on the other two discussion items the proposed well I guess the drive-through goes away without with the building right yes ma'am and then is there any need to discuss number 17 requirements for articles 16 and 18 we'll just allow him to show it when he submits a new plan showing that building 3 is removed okay so therefore he has been working with them with some new layout so he'll be able to show that information so we can get that resolved already some open space to track one to help alleviate those requirements which to help with ILA open space and and And we'll make all those updates with the plan we'll resubmit here after today. Okay, great. Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you. Thank you. Any public comment? Okay, so we'll bring it back. So, to staff, with those changes noted here, are you comfortable moving forward? Are you still recommending postponement? I'm still recommending postponement until they submit the plan for us to review so that we can come up with those revised conditions. Okay. Madam Chair, I move for postponement appeal in MJDP 2460, Hayekers Shopping Center, Track 1. With the now, I guess we're still in the same conditions because you don't have a month. Just leave all the conditions. With the 19 conditions. All right. Second. Okay, so we'll move in a second. All in favor? Aye. Unanimous. Okay, the next development plan is MJDP 24-64, Hamburg Place Farm, Plotted Place Development, Lot 3, Chick-fil-A, amended. This one, we're located out in the Hamburg area. This is Manowar Boulevard and Pleasant Ridge. This is Plotted Place coming through here. In this location, we have Chick-fil-A located here. They are proposing to come in, and they're going to tear down the building and put in a new building. They're rotating at 90 degrees and changing the drive aisles and the parking and everything to make it more favorable for more people. So with that, we have our typical sign-offs, engineering, traffic, landscape, addressing, forester, environmental quality, bike and peg, green space, fire, waste management, our building inspection note. Then we had a couple cleanup conditions, improved plan legibility, addition of property meets and bounds, addition of topography information and two-foot contours, addition of dimensions for driveways, walkways, and access points, buildings, denote location of construction vehicles, addition of proposed and existing easements, addition of tree inventory map, correct commission certification, complete information in the site statistics box for Lot 3. they did provide the site statistics box but they didn't update their information for their property we don't ask them to update it for everybody just as you come in and revise your lot we want you to update it on your lot provided the Board of Adjustment grants approval the variances for landscaping landscape buffer and maximum parking we want to just verify the totals in the site statistics box and discuss the width of the drive lanes and access to plotted place. With this new proposal they're showing three different access points. We have one for two lanes for the drive-through, then we have one for the center to come into the parking lot, and then one to exit the parking lot. We had some concerns over the location of the having three drive-through, three access points across the front when we have access points adjacent on either end of the property. The drive lane in the middle here seems a little wide and so we thought that if we would narrow that down just a little bit that way there's not as much traffic trying to come in it and be forced into driving through so it It was just a question as to why it's so wide. It's like a double lane access. So with that, I'll open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions. Cheryl, so you've got three access points. You're saying narrow the one in the middle. But you've still got three access points. I can chime in. So there's actually a code of ordinances that says you can have three if you have 150 foot of roadway frontage. They have 151 feet. So technically, there's a for it. But when we came in last year, just a concept plan, they showed the access point on the right side of the page. So what the south, whatever, right side of the page. And the drive-through, which is two access points that made the building slightly larger, which, of course, is fine. but to preserve their parking, they had to throw in a third access point so that you could still circulate without losing parking. And just given the narrow roadway frontage, I just had concerns with the number of access points. I mean, it's Chick-fil-A, so obviously we know they're going to have the usage. It's not like it's going to be overbuilt in that respect, But I guess as far as it propagating through other instances where we allow through access points such as short distance, and then again, like they said, there's another access point on each lot directly adjacent. So you have 5 and 225 feet. I mean, there's not an enormous amount of pet activity through here, but again, that's just a lot of ingress and ingress. It's basically almost the whole frontage is access points. That was my concern. And since they showed us a plan that could work, it seems like they could make it work. Still got three access points. Okay. Any other questions? David, were you saying you think they could make it work with you? Yeah, they showed us an access or a plan with two access points. So in that respect, it seems like they could make two access points work. Now, the building got larger, so they're trying to have it both ways and just throw in an access point. And I guess from my perspective, I think, too, it makes more sense, especially in this narrow roadway frontage. But then would that then require you to have an in and out from the parking? Because right now it looks like it's two access in and one out. So what do you mean? Yeah, if it was consolidate, you'd have to consolidate on either or. I would have presumed the rightmost access point would become two-way. You'd have to alter it. I've seen a plan where it worked. It was with a smaller building. So, again, I know the circumstances are different. They just wanted to keep the same number of parking spaces is why they had that. Is that correct? I believe, yeah. Again, the building got about 20% larger, which, again, it's fine. There's nothing wrong with that. But just, again, three access points, especially in as much as small distance, is abnormal and a little concerning as far as the amount of ingress and egress going on. Kind of compared to what it is today, I like that because you have your parking and your drive-thru coming through the same entrance. and there's always a little bit of hairiness there because you've got people leaving the drive-thru, waiting to go into the drive-thru, and then waiting to park. So I see why they did that, and I like it. So the exit for the drive-thru will still intermingle with the people who are parking. So obviously if the parking lot gets backed up, then the drive-thru gets backed up too. So something to... If we could get the proposer up to walk us through the traffic flow. Yes, absolutely. Okay. Any other questions for staff? All right. Applicant. Hi, I'm Cheyenne Day with Interplan Engineering. So yes, when we initially proposed the concept, we did have two access points, but we felt in order to maintain the stacking in the drive-through and still have like a sufficient channelization where you're turning into it that the third access was more beneficial for the Chick-fil-A and getting people on site and out of the roadway. Oh, I am so sorry. I don't know what I hit. We're just going. Sorry. There we go. I don't think you should give that back to me. You're just going to click on that and I'll zoom in on it. Okay, thank you. So would you just trace the incoming to parking, incoming through the order in egress? Just show us the traffic, walk us through the traffic flow. Can you help her find the little pointer thing on there? You got it? Okay, so yes, as I believe it was majority of folks are coming from this direction, but they would, you know, enter if they're going to the drive-thru, there's plenty of signage they will see, enter in the drive-thru here, exit. This is wider here to allow for people to get out of the drive-thru and so that parking does not back them up. It does turn into a single lane exit as well and then you can turn out here and go to the light. I do not like, I'm not technology oriented. We are in agreement with reducing this to a single entryway. It's only going to help our VUA requirements anyways, so getting more green space. But if you aren't going through the drive-thru and coming in for dine-in only. Pull in here, park in any of these places, circle around. There will be a stop bar here to stop anyone from getting in the way of the drive-thru. There will be some painted markings. Thank you. other questions for applicant all right thank you any public comment okay I'm confused on where we are are we going to are we going three I think think they'd like to maintain three. I think it's three because otherwise it's the same that they have today. It's what I see. From the voice of the customer. Right. I mean, I only go there a couple times, but you know. And we mentioned this in tech committee. This is located near the interstate, so quite a bit of their customer base doesn't come here, you know, on a frequent basis, whereas, you know, neighborhood one, maybe on Russell Cave, you might have more. It's not near the interstate, So you might have more neighborhood people who are familiar with the circulation. So, again, they mentioned signage will be important to ensure that the customers get in the right lane, right? So don't go through the parking lot to circle back and get into the drive-through. And if there's ever an exception that we want to make, it's going to be for a use like this, right? they have a customer base and documented issues that, again, as engineers and designers, they think this will address. I was going to say, especially during the peak hours, if they can sign in to encourage people to take a right. Because I know, like, my school's, like, drop-off is basically this way, and there's a right turn only. Because sometimes people don't listen, and you have people trying to make a left in, and then people are waiting to take a left out, but there's nowhere to go and there's nowhere for anybody to stack. So normally that wouldn't be a problem with Chick-fil-A. It may be. So if they can encourage folks to go right to avoid a literal traffic jam on occasion, that would be helpful. Which would probably be in their interest as well, I assume. Okay, Madam Chair, I'm moving for approval appeal in MJDP 2464, for Hamburger Place, Plotty Place Development Lot 3, with the attached 23 conditions. Madam Chair, I'll second that with a request to try and help clean this thing up before we say it again. Okay. Duly noted. All those in favor? Aye. Unanimous. Okay. We approve. All right. Moving on down. Page 5, our next item is PLN MJDP 24-66. for the Town Branch Park, now rebranded as Gatton Park on Town Branch. And this is an amended final development plan. Is there a zoom in? Oh, thank you. So the Town Branch Park, as I think the Planning Commission is aware, but for everyone else, is located to the rear of the Lexington... What's the new name? What's the bank name? Central Bank? I can't remember this. The Rupp Arena area. So in terms of where we are, here's Rupp Arena's parking garage and service area. This is Manchester Street. I'm sure it's been renamed. This is the connection up to High Street. And then this is currently labeled as Cox Street right-of-way. This is Oliver Lewis Way. And then further to the north on the plan is Main Street. So it is tucked behind the Mary Todd Lincoln House and so forth in at least one church. So the applicants are making a few changes to the plan. We're going to go forward here. And it's mostly at the edge of the plan near Oliver Lewis Way. And that includes a new building called the Northeast Building. I'm sorry, Northwest Building. Just labeled that. But we found out at Tech Committee that the purpose of that building is for educational purposes. It is fairly small, so it would be really accessory to the rest of the activities on the site. In addition, adjusting the access up to Oliver Lewis Way here, just to the east of the building, and then adjusting the alignment of what's labeled as Cox Street here. so historically Cox Street connected and goes underneath Oliver Lewis Way to provide access to the R.J. Corman Railroad Yard. That access remains but the right-of-way has kind of changed a bit we understand. So it has been absorbed the right-of-way of Cox Street has been absorbed into the right-of-way of Oliver Lewis Way and it's all within that area but this shift from here over just slightly to here allows for the the park to separate the pedestrian and the and the via vehicular traffic and again the vehicular traffic coming through here is almost solely related to RJ Corman's activity what isn't isn't shown on their development plan but you should be aware is that the the railroad yard is excess accessed currently through this Cox Street access way but it will in the future be and have its primary access from Buchanan Street which Buchanan Street comes up onto Main Street between I I think it's, there's a Messer, is it Messer Construction? Between Messer Construction and I think one of the monument sales buildings up there. So they won't be using hopefully this access quite as frequently, and it would be just from Buchanan Street. The one, or the two things, in addition to some general sign-offs, was to correct the plan title to match the staff report. again we're going to keep the main name and we'll put the gotten part in parentheses the note the proposed use of the new Northwest Building which we discussed at Tech Committee and then discuss the need for and timing of the Cox Street locate relocation and they I'm sure Steven Vogel from strand can explain a little bit better than I can why they are shifting it but the timing would be an issue in terms of they would reconstruct it and if they need to or want to they'll work with the city to release any right-of-way if that's necessary but the staff is recommending and the tech committee recommended approval thank you any questions for staff okay thank you applicant Steve Vogel strain associates I think Tracy's trying to steal my job because she just said everything that I was gonna say again the purpose of this plan is to relocate Cox Street slightly to the west and that is to reintroduce the the loop pedestrian path that goes around the park if this was originally shown on our original development plan however because of some budget concerns we had to shorten some of the efforts we were doing in the park and so we weren't able to create that loop path that goes all the way around the park you actually cross the bridge which you can see just off to the right on the screen coming down on the bottom and that was a smaller loop in the path in the park now we're creating that full loop around the park it actually is part of town branch common so it'll It'll be the Town Branch Trail through Gatton Park on the Town Branch. It will connect to both locations that it's currently connected to on the Town Branch Trail connection, which is underneath Oliver Lewis Way and then also up to Manchester and over Oliver Lewis Way, which are the two connection points that it has now. So, again, the shift allows us to create that pedestrian path. And then, as Tracy said, we're adding a small educational building. It will be, its intended use now is for a short part of the year to be a butterfly house where they can hatch butterflies. That's only like a month out of the year. The rest of the year it will be used for other educational programming activities. So probably should have named it something other than Northwest Building, which we'll adjust on the plan. We'll probably call it the Education Building. But those are the two elements of the plan. Happy to answer any questions. I was just going to say we can change 10 to resolve, and it's not, I think the need for it is clear now, but just resolve the timing of the Cox Street relocation. Sure. And the timing of that, we've already been in discussion with the Division of Engineering, who has been working on the modifications to Manchester and the connector to High Street. That's actually an LFUCG project. And so the contractor for that project and the contractor for the park project have been working together to create a maintenance of traffic plan so that access to RJ Corman, to the park construction, and to the lower access to the Rupp Arena parking, all of that can be maintained. Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? All right, thank you. Thank you. Public comment? Okay. Madam Chair, I'll move for recommendation approval MJDP 24-66 Town Branch Park. With the 10 conditions, change in number 10 to resolve. Number 9, was it? It was 10, okay. Second. All right, we're moving second. All in favor? Aye. All in favor? Yes, I'm sorry. You did it in second. Sorry. Yes? Okay, we're moving forward. We're going to MJDP 2467 Lixmark International, Section 1, Lot 7, amended. This is what we were talking about with the final record plot earlier. You can see this is the blown-up version here. It sets our way. Then it loops it in here to Freight Boulevard, which then takes you out to Newtown Pike here. Let's see. Here you go. This is better with the Setzer Way and then Loudon Avenue. This is showing the layout for the four lots that the applicant was talking about as far as the structures. And you can see there's a number of utility easements crossing through that she's been working on. And we'll have an access easement. We'll have to make a finding for an access easement to get into the property to serve these lots back here in the back that don't have frontage. So we'll have that with this plan. So we have our typical sign-offs, engineering traffic, landscape, addressing, forest or environmental quality, bike ped, green space, fire, waste management, water quality, the post office. Then we have a list of cleanup conditions, the building inspection note, correct scale and plan face, the scale that they have it drawn at and the scale that they label it as are incorrect, correct plan type to amend it final development plan and preliminary subdivision plan to be showing how we're subdividing this into additional lots. name and address of developer, contour lines, light and contour lines for legibility, remove darker line around 791 freight boulevard on the previous plan. They show a dark line and that was the previous development plan amendment so we need to have that removed because we're not working with this. Clarify street names and vicinity map, depict cross sections on plan face dimension walkway driveways walkways parking spaces remove gravel hatching we're not quite sure if this what kind of parking if it is parking it looks like gravel so but we're not allowed to use gravel so it has to be blacktop asphalt or concrete we're not sure if they're going to try to use pavers on this and that's why they have that gravel looking we need to have more information on that remove utility line and only depict the boundaries of the easements addition of tree inventory correct owner certification planning Commission certification addition of the new site statistics box for this property and completing the information on lot 7 to note review by the Royal Springs aquifer addition of maintenance note for the access easement that's going to crossover lots 7A, C, and D. Correct purpose of amendment note, adjust building setback lines to be 20 feet from across easements, not property line. Denote gas easement through 7A and 7C. Discuss conflicts between the structures on lot 7B and the easements. Discuss compliance with articles 16, 18, and 20 and discuss proposed uses of the new structures. She kind of led into some of that when we were talking about the record plat, but I'll allow the applicant to go a little more detail with that. If there's any other questions, I'll ask them. Questions for staff? All right, thank you, applicant. Hello again. So we have actually, again, greatly simplified the concept with our client. We've not had a chance to get revised comments and things like that taken care of. But the basic items that we've done to simplify the process and the project at this point in time is that the lower left-hand building, it's labeled as phase two on here, we've taken the building shape off of it completely because it's, we were trying to be very upfront with what are the end games that we're trying to do here, not just, you know, we're doing this one thing now, we're going to come back and come back and come back. So we wanted to show that we're intending to relocate some easements in that area, but that'll take 15 months. So we're going to take that building off and we're not going to show those proposed easement changes at this point in time until they've been executed because that's going to take a long time to execute. So that's one major thing that simplifies this greatly. We've also changed the shapes of the building a bit to be able to accommodate the fact that we found a few more easements from when we submitted two days after the sale of the property to actually getting the final survey finished. So we've been able to stay out of the vast majority of the easements except for that future phase that we will be coming back to you at some point in the future about. All of that hatching is pervious pavers. We were trying to show that. It was a little bit dark. take that off and just add a note or a different type of line weight there I did have one specific question so the Royal Springs aquifer committee it's actually listed as the Royal Springs water supply protection committee in the storm manual they do not have a website and being that it's 2024 that surprised me so I thought I would maybe share that that that's maybe something that they should do because it's difficult to find out contact information for them since they don't have a website it's run by Georgetown so right I'm just going to share that with them as well okay yeah yeah but the official name of it is slightly different than what's listed in your comments from what I also found and so I'm getting with Georgetown on that but I just want to let you know that it is difficult to find out some of those dates since they don't apparently use websites they don't have dates you just let them know that you have a plan to review and they will set a meeting okay we will we will do that I just had expected a little something available online we will we're working through that we've also we're also not intending to touch any of the trees on the property in our current phases the only trees I'm going to walk away from the microphone to point and come right back I'm not going to talk while I'm over here That's the only section with trees and we're not touching it. So again, we've taken care of the vast majority of these items, the Royal Springs Aquare Committee being a pretty large item to take care of. And we've also, I apparently smacked that. Okay. I will not touch that again though. So you can see where the trees kind of come in on that end there. And we worked through one of the questions that we had yesterday with staff, which was what do we do? Because kind of the original ask was to show everything at the 100 scale, but the 15 easements were really hard to tell what was going on. So we're going to do that detail area in a slightly different way. So I think we've got our questions answered. We'll be giving them updated plans on Friday is our intention. So we understand that we will not be able to get anything other than a postponement recommendation at this time But I did want to just share that we have made significant strides And I think that we'll be able to work through these items because we've simplified the plan instead of working To try to get the maximum amount of everything that we could possibly get approval for at this time So what is the proposed use of the building? The front building is a contractor that's going to be Yep Yeah, I see it all together. Okay. But you're not talking about the existing buildings. You're talking about the new building that fronts on Setzer is a contractor? Yes. And then what about the other two? Those are going to be their subcontractors. We'll have some exterior storage for their cherry pickers and some of those other types of equipment on the property. And we talked with staff about the need for that to potentially be fenced. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Committee. Madam Chair, I move for post-pumming appealing MJDP 2467 Lexmark International Section 1 Lot 7 with the attached, is it still 35 conditions? Yes. Okay. I can second that. I do have one question. With with all the changes and this thing's very fluid. Is it possible for this to come back to us in committee? So the commission does have until November 3rd, so you could postpone it next week. Is that okay with Abby? Oh, I don't. I think her client does not prefer that, is what she said, just for everybody else. Okay. I'll still second it. All right. Okay. All those in favor? Aye. We got it unanimous. Go ahead. Okay. We're moving forward to the zone changes. So, the first zoning development plan we have is MJDP 24-61 Shadeland Investments property. it's located at the up here at the corner of Eastern whoops Eastern and second there's an existing structure on the property with parking to the rear and they're wanting to rezone the property to be one we have our typical sign-offs engineering traffic Forester planner then we had some cleanup conditions addition of dimensions for driveway walkways and parking egress ingress and egress addition of tree inventory map addition of use in the site statistics we always like to know on our plans what we're doing in the structures remove the driveway apron on 2nd Street it looks like there's an apron here leading out to Section Street, possibly for this area here. We'd like to see that removed due to the location of the intersection. Discuss compliance with the open space requirements of Article 20. Discuss plan type. Is this a final or a preliminary? discuss use of the area to the northwest of the building and that is this area here it looks like they're adding addition but this one here we didn't know what they were doing it looks like there might be like a concrete area so we didn't know if that was going to be their open space how they were gonna apply that and then we have the last condition is discuss place builder criteria since this is a zone change so I'll open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions and then mr. Crumb will speak with you good morning everyone Daniel Crumb planning staff so in terms of place builder this is a application that is sort of just on the outskirts of downtown so they've they've seeking to associate this with a second-tier urban so this is the areas just outside of downtown older primarily residential this is an example of a property that has been commercial as far as anyone living can recall however it does have residential zoning so they're seeking to fix that and be able to kind of have the full suite of normal commercial uses instead of having to keep going to the Board of Adjustment I think they've had four or five cases or so at this point it's a two-story building they're doing a two-story addition that's firmly within medium density so the the zone place type and development type are all recommended here with regards to community engagement I did sit on a virtual zoom meeting with the applicant the developer and members of the neighborhood it wasn't particularly well attended so at the meeting the applicant indicated that they were willing to come to their in-person meeting that I believe is a little bit later on this month so there were representatives from the East End neighborhood present but once again with the demographics that neighborhood the virtual meeting seemed to be some issues connecting fully with the neighborhood but they plan on as far as I'm aware attending the in-person meeting which historically from my past attendance has been much more involved so we'll get some extra feedback from that but otherwise staff is going to be recommending approval later on this afternoon but I'd be happy to entertain any questions you all have of me at this time any place builder question what's the use yes so currently it is a office uses so at this time they're proposing more additional office space but the B1 would give them flexibility in the future to do things like retail restaurant meeting space etc so kind of a full scale of neighborhood business uses would be on the table the other question thank you applicant we're okay with the partners John what all here as well working on the zoning portion and he just told me that there will be some potential conditional zoning restrictions for those uses as it works through the process. The site to the, in front of the addition is open space patio area. We're fine with removing the existing curb cut to it. Where our proposed building is and that patio currently is all concrete right now so they're just essentially adding a two story structure over what's already asphalt. We'll add the dimensions. I believe the final development plan is correct. The site is as is. We're just going to add building over that concrete. So I think all the sign-offs can come within the two-week period. Several little cleanup items in there that we'll do. Open space, we'll get an exhibit to Boyd. Tree inventory map and tree preservation plan. Both statistics are on there because it's both a zone change for the map And it's a final development plan, so you get the preservation plan. Is this, as in number 11, is this final or preliminary? Final. Yeah, unless someone's going to have a problem with the sign-off in two weeks, that should be easy. Okay. All right. Any other questions for our applicants? This is just to catch me up here. I think I looked this up on the PVA website. Is this where the Stephen Hine floors was located, that old building? Yep. That's the most recent nonconforming use that's been there, yes. Now it's used for offices? Yes. Yeah, they have an office on the second floor. So you're expanding onto that building, or you're not leveling the building? No, no, no, just an addition next door. Okay. Part of the florist conditional use, I think, was to continue being nonconforming but no expansion. So to get the expansion, we have to bring the zoning into conformity. And does this deviate? Is that? No. No. It's still just office uses. Yeah. Okay. Thanks for that. Okay. Great. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Committee. Let's turn it. Madam Chair, I'll move for recommendation approval of Plan MJDP 24-61 Shadeland Investments with the 13 conditions. Second. Okay. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Okay. See you next time. You can write it on. Thank you. We're moving down on our zone changes. The next one is Hazen property, Montmolin Street subdivision, and JA Prahl property. This is Burr, Lexington. This is located, this is South Limestone across from the B&E building at UK. This is Montmolin and this is Prawl. There's retail shops right through here. I think there's a pizza place and a little convenience store kind of along the front here. And they're going to remove those buildings and they're coming back in to put in an apartment building. changing the zone to CN for I'm gonna get this wrong corridor corridor node okay corridor node which is a new zone zoning in our ordinance so with that they're coming in to build a apartment building it's It's going to have 250 apartments for 700 bedrooms, 10 stories tall. I think it's 10 stories tall. So with that, we have engineering traffic. We want a correct plan title to match staff report. Whenever we put titles on plans, we always use the property owner's title. That's why you see these three different names on here because that was the original property owners on the property. That's for us to be able to do our research to get the correct name the next time. Addition of record plat information. There are several pieces of property that had record plats. Addition of tree inventory. Discuss the proposed maximum floor area ratio of 3.6. With the corridor node, there's a way to calculate the floor area ratio, and we wanted to have it spelled out for us to explain how they reached that. It was with different uses as far as like a parking garage or retail, so we wanted that to be clarified. Clarify eight-foot offset of the building along South Limestone. It looks, this being South Limestone here, it looks like there's like an indentation, and we just wanted to figure out if this is a cantilever of the floor above or how that is to work. Submit building elevations. They did submit some elevations. I'm not sure that we have those uploaded. Here's a better picture showing how this building will fit within the neighborhood. Addition of floor area ratio in the site statistics box dimension parking garage aisles and parking spaces denote parking garage entrance and dimensions denote no vehicular access to South limestone and denote location of public transit stop or facilities. This is part of the corridor node requirements is to show both the bus locations for this. So with that, I will open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions. Questions for staff? If not, this is a zone change. Mr. Cram will come up and give you some more information. Okay. Thank you. All right, Daniel Crum planning staff once again with the properties location on South Limestone that's about as much of a corridor as a corridor gets so highly intense roadways really one of the areas that from the comprehensive plan side of things we're really looking to intensify so our comprehensive plan lays out and recommends high density residential and mixed-use type uses so the applicants proposed zone isn't recommended because well it was created after the adoption of the comprehensive plan so this is meeting all of the things that we're looking for for high density development so it does have a mixture of uses that are going to be activating that ground floor with residential above it and incorporating a parking structure into it so this is really trying to maximize the site you know get additional density that they're calling for now in much similar to conversations that we've had recently with properties on harrisburg road part of the conversation will be as well how we balance development on the corridor here with the existing conditions kind of further in we have the the prowl town kind of neighborhood here which has been sort of redeveloped over time but is mostly kind of single family kind of two two to three stories so kind of balancing those impacts there's something that I think is going to be important as we move forward but as terms of density and in building up and really getting the units we need on the corridor in order to help make the corridor more efficient and to kind of provide that needed housing this application is doing that so staff is recommending approval later on this afternoon but once again having the discussion point on how we balance the corridor with the existing residential conditions that at this time mostly is students but I'm happy to entertain any questions you have of staff and once again we'll be going to a little bit more detail later on this afternoon with in terms of public engagement the applicant did have a another virtual meeting with some surrounding property owners staff was unable to attend that particular meeting so the applicant would be able to kind of provide more information on how that was attended and kind of what the concerns were raised there, but wanted to bring that attention as well. All right. Any other questions for staff? Daniel, thank you. I heard 10 stories, so obviously there's got to be some sort of incoming. Yeah, so, and... Seven. Yeah. How did I hear 10? Yes. Seven stories. Yeah, and... Okay, that's okay. That's okay. Seven stories is still good. Obviously, internal access upstairs. I'm just looking at the way that appears to be divided up. The ground floor, will they have external access into their units? So, yeah, and it will probably be easier to understand when we kind of show the elevations they've provided. So the hill, as you're going up Mullen Street and up Prawl Street, that elevation climbs. So at the very front of the property, you have kind of ground floor activated uses where that's the highest. So that is seven full stories at this point here, kind of with your ground entrances and the like. As you move further back, the ground floor, it ends up being about six floors to the rear. There is an amenity building that's located in a rooftop kind of amenity area centralized to the property there. So as you're moving back, I don't see any indication that there's going to be sort of excess units from the street there. I think it's going to be done internally through the parking garage, et cetera. But as you go back, it's really closer to six floors of residential, which still is a contrast to the two and three that surround it, but isn't as pronounced as it is sort of with the lowest elevation on South Limestone, where you have the first four retail, six floors above, and then an amenity space on top of that. Okay. All right. And then you said parking structure. Where is it and how many spaces go there? Yes. So, yeah, we go back one. Yes. So it's located internally. So you've got limestone here, Montmolin, and Prahl. So the entrances to the development are going to come through these two streets. You would come in off of these streets and then basically rotate through, and it's included, I think, all seven stories. Parking-wise, I think they're somewhere in the mid-400s, and that's looking at, I think, 250 units and 799 beds. So the applicant can speak to their particular model, But my understanding is this is all going to be permitted and kind of incorporated into that lease structure and sold. So they are kind of building into the idea that they are close to UK's campus. This is oriented towards students. And with South Limestone looking to have some major transportation improvements as a part of the corridor study there, they're playing into that. But, yes, 400 and something spaces off the top of my head is what they're providing on site, all within that structure. Can you go back to the next one? Okay. So there's no vehicular access on South Lime. You've got the two intersecting streets. Where do people get in and out? I mean, I drove that the other day, and that's hard to navigate in through there as a car. Yeah, so there's light here. and traffic engineering has indicated, I believe, that there's some improvements that are going to be looking to be done specifically at this intersection on Prawl, but they would have the ability to go either way. And as you go further back in the neighborhood, there is connections built into there as well as accessibility for that park. So really your signalized light, though, is going to be on Prawl Street, but they'll have the opportunity to do both. But as anyone who's been in that area, the signal is going to be crucial with the amount of traffic and the amount of pedestrians that are involved in the area. Okay, thank you. Applicant? Good morning. Nick Nicholson here on behalf of subtext two representatives from the developers group are here if you have any questions Ryan bump and Jack Cavanaugh and so if you all have specific questions about their product I'm happy to bring them up here and answer any questions I have a couple elevations for you that I think will probably help explain access and also where the parking structure is if I can hand this out to you if you want to basically see I thought that these were gonna be loaded on the PowerPoint and I apologize about that but that shows that there are two basically access points on Mount Mullen on the first floor one's kind of directed towards the retail space that is it's kind of there and then the second access is into the parking garage which will have kind of a gated access point that is internal that parking structure then just kind of winds its way up for the seven stories of that building there's also an egress point on Prawl Street as well in order to make sure that you you were not overloading any of the individual streets as far as kind of what this looks like here are three kind of elevations this is looking at it from University's campus and kind of looking at it towards Prahl Street and then I have a couple close-ups that you can look at one in particular that will allow you to see the cantilever on South limestone to kind of clarify what we're doing with regards to the setback. And that eight-foot notch corresponds with the entry to the retail building. Well, so we printed out a set just for our file, but Hal said he found that the the renderings were only loaded to the zoning file and not the development plan file, so that's why they weren't included in the packet. Sorry. Well, so, right, so Paula looks in the development plan for this presentation, and she doesn't necessarily go dig around in all the zoning application files, so just, but it will be shown this afternoon, because it's in the, right? We did not mean that against you all personally, we promise. But we're trying to basically expand the pedestrian, you know, the width that's right there on South Limestone. And also if you look at that kind of covered walkway that goes into the retail center, that's entirely designed around multimodal access and be able to have more of kind of stacking that would be available for that intersection because anyone who's ever driven, you know, around basically 9 a.m. or 12, you can see the students that basically back up there. But basically what we are wanting to do is basically introduce a kind of building type that will draw the pedestrians and kind of multimodal folks into that area, into that courtyard. That's also where all of our internal bike parking will be, and so it will be easy for our students to basically pick up their bike in their storage facility and then basically ride right out into campus. But as far as the FAR goes, we have submitted those informations with regards to where that calculation is coming from. We have some recessed parking that is basically below grade, and also with the retail space, the FAR, the way the corridor node zone works, you're able to increase your FAR basically two for one for any square foot of retail space or below grade parking. The good news is FAR is a hard number, a hard calculation number, and we have to meet it. It's just a requirement. And we certainly will be able to do that between now and the time of the final development plan once we kind of know what is actually approved as far as this building type and zone are concerned. Beyond that, I am happy to answer any questions. That's not a question, just a comment. And it's, I'm not the architect. We have an architect in the afternoon group. So my comments are not going to reflect architecture and any taste regarding that. I just, I like what you've done with the sort of contemporary design, but also the nod with the color to what's across the street in the old traditional part of campus. It looks, I like the way it looks. My favorite part is with that little kind of pedestrian chute that we have, it lines up perfectly with the walkway into Memorial Hall, and the building was entirely designed around that concept. You have this pathway, like let's go ahead and take advantage of what is a kind of unusual, not 90 degree hit onto limestone in order to kind of continue to kind of appreciate that. This part of South Limestone, if you look in the Imagine Lexington and the future state plans, is going to be basically improved in order to lower the speed limits and also to lower the amount of driving lanes. The kind of idea is for Center Lane to basically have a bus service, and the transit stop for the planned bus lane is directly in front of this building. So we think it kind of lines up with everything that the city and the state are planning and what the conference plan is calling for. Currently the bus and stop right here is Mr. Kaley. So what Mr. Cayley just appropriately said away from the microphone is that there is a bus stop just to the south, basically where the UK parking lot is right now. And my guess is that that would change once the improvements are made to South Limestone. I'll just comment. Daniel made passing. We are, along with UK, we're improving the intersection. We're rebuilding the traffic signal. UK wants to get rid of some of the utilities. and then they're changing some parking at their lot just across the street. They're going to push the parking back to widen the sidewalk and rebuild the transit stop. Did not know this project was coming. Actually, the 100% plans were yesterday. But I think in conjunction, they're looking to get a lot of the utilities out of the way. I think obviously this project probably is as well. It is. It's one of the first questions I asked. This project will be burying all those utility lines that are out there, and someone who walked that block a whole lot. I can tell you there's a lot of poles. There are a lot of different low-lying lines that are certainly an eyesore. So, one, whether Rory got these things uploaded, I do like to elevate. Just the exhibits. They are helpful, and we do appreciate it. And I'll echo what Judy said. it does look good. The looks of it is good. The one question I have, you mentioned gated access. Is the parking going to be open for retail? So the ground floor basically is set aside for retail parking and the quick stops. The gated kind of takes place a little bit after, kind of as you're going up to the first floor of the parking garage. How do you keep students from sneaking in there and parking for classes? Yeah. That's maintenance. Yeah, that's your problem. Yeah, that is our problem. Just curious. Okay. I did go to school there. Thank you. For the retail and leasing agent stuff, the gates are here as you go into the. Oh, okay. So that's where it's resident. There's not much. Thank you. I have a question with regard to neighborhood meetings. Have you had a meeting, and what are the neighbors saying? We did. There were only, I think there were four people in attendance, only three of which I think actually just made comments, and it was concerned about the one, just what was the actual size of the structure, and there was some confusion over if we were rezoning their property or not. I think when they received a letter about a zone change, they thought it was for their piece of property. And so we clarified that that was not the case. We didn't have these elevations, but we did have kind of basically initial set of this is what we're talking about. Here is kind of the area of the building that it was associated there with. The other houses that are there, are those occupied at this point? The houses that are subject to this kind of rezone, they are for student housing. Everything is student housing. Okay. I mean, they're occupied. I guess is that, was that owner represented, I guess, as kind of. So, like, there's a purchase agreement with all of these properties. And so, the owners have basically sent in owner authorizations letter for this zone change. And we're basically working with them on leases in order to make sure that if this goes through, if it's during any type of school year that we're handling that type of situation. Okay, great. Thank you. Any other questions for Africa? All right, thanks. I do think we have members of the neighborhood here. Okay. Public comment time. You would come forward. Good morning. Good morning. Would it state your name and address? Yes. My name is Betty Boyd. I live at 195 Prowl Street. And I have lived in Prowl Town for 77 years. Can you believe that? Nobody can believe that, but that's true. I'm 78, so I know it's true. Okay. I'm totally against the development plan due to the fact that I've lived through some changes going way back to urban renewal. I don't know if some of you all remember that, but that was the thing that caused a lot of the vacant lots and people moving away that really hurt our neighborhood. They promised us that they would be bringing back residential housing, which did not happen. We fought to get the residential permit so that we would not have to deal with apartments coming into. the neighborhood that never happened so I'm here to tell you that I don't want it they haven't addressed anything as to how it affects the neighborhood only how it affects UK only concerned about UK not our neighborhood the meeting that he mentioned I guess it was a mix-up I got a note that said 530 they had the meeting at five o'clock. Yes, there were very few people that were at the meeting. I called in and they only had like two questions left and the meeting was over. So I don't know how much you want to know, but I could tell you plenty that's happened to Praudetown and we love Praudetown, don't want it. So I have plenty of notes here that I could go through, but if you have any questions about why I feel the way I do please ask me no questions any questions do you have a so is there a neighborhood association or were they was anybody from neighborhood association at the last minute At the last meeting? Yes. Okay. All right. Well, I'm going to ask this again. I think we sort of hinted at this. I'm not real clear. How many actual individual houses will be taken out in this development? And are those houses individually owned? Or are they landlords who are renting students? or what's happening there? Well, they have a sheet on the houses that they've identified that they will be taking down. Yeah, I was thinking that they are, you know, working out selling those. But that was sort of a general. I'm looking for more specifics. Those are specific on the note as far as the addresses of the streets on Prawl and Mount Mullen. I guess the other... Do we want the applicant? Is that a question for the applicant? Yeah, maybe. Okay. All right. Do we have any other... Do you have any additional comments you'd like to make? No, not at this time. Okay. All right. Thank you. To answer the question on the number of houses, there are 10 structures. It's 19 actual parcels, but only 10 houses. All of them are landlord, LLC owned. Rented out to college students entirely. I told Bruce Simpson, who I believe is representing the neighborhood, or at least helping out, that we're more than happy to sit down and talk to them at their convenience. I'm sorry about the mix-up with regards to the time. I'm not sure how exactly that happened, but I'm more than happy to sit down anytime. I want to receive one other request from a neighbor to sit down, and I told them that we're more than happy to at their convenience. Okay. All right, thank you. It sounds like that's something that needs to happen with the rest of the neighbors, particularly the individual owners. okay all right we're back at committee madam chair I knew for a postponement appeal in MJDP 2462 Hazen property McMullen Street property with the attached 15 conditions second move the second all in favor all right you nanas postponed great moving on down page seven items cannot before we get started can we take like five minutes okay Thank you. Oh, where's my mic? Tracy, question. If we have one to leave, do we still have a quorum? how many you before you have seven members or eight six yeah four is good okay all right Mike may need to leave a little bit sorry okay okay we're getting close so our next item appears on page seven item C this is our third zone change for the month so again these will be heard at At the end of the month. Excuse me. Can we have everyone's attention? We are resuming. Mr. Nicholson, could you all take conversations in the hall? Thanks. Okay. So, PLN MJDP 24-65 for Springhurst Subdivision Unit 2. And the new owner is the Brook Properties. So, this area probably looks somewhat familiar to the Planning Commission members. We just recently, actually last month, had a zone change for the adjoining property. So we are at the intersection of Springhurst Drive and Harrodsburg Road, directly across from what was historically known as Turflin Mall. But a lot of that's been reused for UK health care. It does still have some of the commercial uses, though, and some outlots along the front. Barbecue place. Barbecue place, yeah. Thank you. But the applicant has two lots that are currently zoned R3, and their request to go through the zone change and associated development plan review is to go to B1 zoning. So you'll remember the lot adjoining here for the tuning property went to a B3 request for a drive-through and some retail uses. so the the applicant is again wishing to rezone to an B1 zone they are showing a very very small addition to lot one no change to lot two and other aspects of the property include an access point to Harrodsburg Road for looks like employee parking and a driveway and then two access points under Springhurst to allow for circulation the current use of these two properties is a daycare use so one building houses the older children and the other like the infants and one and two year old rooms but the applicant is wishing to rezone I guess they've told us verbally in order to allow daycares are a conditional use in the R3 zone but the use they want for lot one is an office strictly office and that is only allowed in the business uses business zone so asking for the B1 zone in order to convert our understanding was this structure into an insurance office so there are parking spaces delineated three out front here which would become non-conforming and then I think it's eight in the back and then the play area for the daycare me a zoom in she did she did give me a zoom in so the the kind of issues that were um in front of the tech committee some of those had been addressed with a revision and so we do have a handout on this one we are down to 18 conditions they did address some missing site statistics and incorrect information on the face of the plan i think probably the most concerning or most The thing we need to talk about the most is the access. So the existing access for the daycare is probably adequate here. It's just one spot. Even though there previously had been a circle drive, it's been blocked by a fence. So really they just have the one access point on Harrodsburg Road. And I know that's concerning to the applicant, but the staff believes that it can be consolidated. the access points can be consolidated along Harrodsburg Road potentially with the adjoining development again that we just saw last month here so they've requested a write-in write-out from the state and the Planning Commission through traffic engineering and if that access to this parking area can be consolidated with the adjoining lot that would benefit traffic along Harrodsburg road so the staff believes that at the time of development at 2090 that this access point should be removed obviously that's going to be something that needs to be discussed with the applicant but also the state and then traffic engineering it becomes a little difficult because they're not proposing redevelopment at this point just using the existing homes but their potential in a B1 zone obviously increases for redevelopment and the possibility of other uses and more intense uses you know increases too other things we did have some questions at Tech Committee about the proposed addition which was discussed It appears to be related to the daycare, but that their at least long-term goal was for this lot to be used by an office and why this particular addition for the daycare would be made to this building as opposed to this building. So that's the discussion there. And then we left it on there, discuss a turn lane along Heronsburg Road frontage. and I think you know as we are moving forward with additional commercial possibilities along this frontage and then the adjoining property that may change the warrant for a dry a lane along Harrodsburg Road but I think we should at least remain cognizant of that as a possibility and then lastly to discuss place builder criteria the staff is recommending approval at this point and again I think that the discussion items remain for the access consolidation possibility and frontage improvements as well as the lot one location part addition location Any questions? Good one. Crazy use? Yes. Proposed use? Well, it's historically been daycare. Yeah. And our conversations with the applicant have indicated lot one, which is the one on the left side, would be an office. Oh, okay. Which makes sense. That would kind of trigger a zone change. But the site statistics that they show still call out lot one as a daycare office and lot two as the daycare facility, if we read it correctly. Okay. Daycare. It's just listed as daycare. Okay. Thank you. all right Daniel Crum planning staff so stop me if you've heard this before but corridor we're looking to intensify trying to balance that with the adjoining single-family neighborhood so a lot of the same considerations conversations that we had for the adjoining property to the east there are really in play here. So the applicant is seeking a different zone, so a less intense zone, so the B1 instead of the B3, but we're still looking at sort of balancing those same elements, doing more on the corridor while also kind of trying to protect the neighborhood. So the applicant is showing keeping these existing structures, which really isn't an increase in density, But the argument that they make in their justification is towards the B1 allows in the future of the site to develop Would allow it to intensify some and kind of meet that in the future But it is a little bit difficult to kind of apply some of the place builder criteria When you're really not changing much on the site other than the uses So staff took a look at this with the context of the Still single-family residential adjoining here to the south with the R1C zone and the access to the site primarily at this time being off of Springhurst. The applicant's current proposal, while being lower density, allows it maybe in the future to expand, but the B1 does predict some limits that are a little bit higher in the B3. So we think that redevelopment of the site can occur in a way that doesn't compromise the neighborhood and gets kind of what we're looking for in a corridor. So the applicant's choice in place type we agree with. We agree that they're building towards that medium density that we're calling for. And the zone is recommended as far as neighborhood engagement once again There was a virtual meeting with the neighborhood staff did attend this There was a couple of members present and then the applicant during that Conversation did get some contact information and my understanding is in that time they've had conversations with some of the same folks That attended the 2090 Hearing and they've been in communication communication but they can let you know if they have any plans to have further in-person meetings but kind of continuing the pattern of virtual meetings just not having the same kind of Attendance and involvement as kind of you know physically getting out there, but staff was present for that They had concerns once again much of the same, you know traffic, you know flooding in the area, etc. So Many of the same concerns made the same people involved with that but happy to entertain any questions We will be recommending approval later on this this afternoon With the inclusion of a conditional zoning restriction that there's no outdoor lights loudspeakers that But once again a lot of the uses that we spent kind of time taking out and then the adjoining property Don't necessarily come into play in a beat one with sort of how we've changed that up So happy to entertain any questions you have about the zoning side of things. We'll talk about it a little bit later on this afternoon any questions all right thank you one thing i'm sorry uh maybe it should have came a moment ago but uh we talked about harrodsburg road and the access there uh the spring hose there's kind of like a circle with two access points it is the two access points going to go away and just become one at this time they're not proposing changing that access so based on what they're showing here those would both remain. Okay. Thank you. Applicant. Good morning. John Woodall and Scott Southall with Recycle Designs on behalf of the applicant. Try to fill in a few blanks here. This property, both properties actually, 2094 and 2098 had been used as a daycare, I think, you know, under a conditional use permit for I think about the last, at least the last decade. I think one side, 2098 was an infant daycare, and I believe 2094 was a pre-K daycare. Our client, Brook Properties, purchased both sites, both 2094 and 2098, and in turn, from the actual daycare operator. and then in turn entered into a lease with that operator for the next five years, right for two five-year extensions for 2094. So there's still going to be a daycare operated at 2094, which is the property adjacent to what will be the Dutch Brothers Coffee site. The intent, his intent here for 2098, Clint Conrad is our client, wrote properties. He is a State Farm agent, and he's a young agent, and his dream has been to have his own office, and he's over, I think, in Beaumont somewhere now, and his goal is to put his State Farm office at this particular site. Now, the addition, the question is why are you putting the addition then next to the adjacent or connecting it to what will be the office building? Number one, we need a B1 to be able to conduct an office there. Like I said, the CUP was applicable to the daycare. But there has to be a point of control or drop-off for the daycare. Let me see. The parents come in off of Springhurst, and they come into the 2098 lot, and they drop their children off. right now they go through they walk through the 2098 building which will be the office that's a point of control and a check-in spot and so when he has his office there the idea is I'd rather not have the children walking through the back of the office every day so the point is to have them in this 8 by 10 building as a check-in point the access directly off of Harrodsburg Road that trait that Ms. Boyd mentioned. That point, it was a circle drive. One part of it is blocked, but the other is used just simply by daycare staff. So we understand that due to the rezoning of the adjacent property and the new access point there, staff wants to close ours. We don't necessarily agree with that at this particular time, given the use we're putting to the property. And here's the important thing. Daniel mentioned neighborhood engagement. We did have an initial Zoom call, which was attended by a couple of the neighbors, which then I had been trying to get a hold of T. Bergman, who's the Neighborhood Association president, and her email address had changed. We finally did that last week, actually, and then we had a meeting actually Tuesday night. She let me know that many of the residents, and I knew this, in the neighborhood are older and didn't do Zoom and wanted to have an in-person meeting. So we did that Tuesday evening on site and had eight families there. They are supportive of our project, having listened to what we're doing and what Mr. Conrad had to say. But here's the important thing. I understand the Dutch Brothers development and there was this talk about a service road that would come through that property through our property and connect to Springhurst. The neighbors don't want that at all. And we heard that on the Zoom call and we heard that on site in person on Tuesday. And we promised that to the best of our ability, whatever control we had over it, that we wouldn't agree to doing that. It doesn't make any sense for our site. We're a corner site. And, you know, at some point, if this property does redevelop, Mr. Conrad's goal is to be able to, at some point, use both of these buildings for his offices. But for right now, at least for the foreseeable future, longer than short term, 2094 will remain a daycare under a lease. And then 2098 will simply be a state farm office. So, you know, we have, because we've reduced that from one, two day cares to one, it's clearly less traffic. But the neighbors are, neighborhoods are in support of what we were doing. And we, in fact, before the hearing, expect to have a letter of support indicating that. But, so I think we've done all we can do with neighborhood engagement. I think they're a little tired out, too, from the adjacent one. But, Scott, you have anything to add to that? I was going to say, I don't think I have anything to add at this point in time to entertain questions. I just want to go back to the addition you're adding. I can understand why the insurance agent wouldn't want those little kids trapping through the building. But what that does is put those kids outside from the time they get there until they go to the building they're going to be in. I don't understand the logic of having that check-in point in a different building if they're moving to the right. Yeah. Well, you have to be on the site and see how close it is together. I mean, they're going to be let out somewhere. So it's either in the front of 2098 or in the rear where we show the building where the check-in point is now. and then they'll go in there, they'll get checked in, and then they go immediately into the daycare center at 2094. Well, they're going to go outside anyway. Unless you design it so that there's some sort of covered drop-off pointer. Is that a possibility? With the elevations and so forth, that's a tough one. This was the best place to put it. And this system, like I said, they've operated this daycare there a long time. So this system has worked. If I were a parent, I wouldn't be crazy about that, but, you know. Yeah. Any other questions for the applicant? all right I'm sorry go ahead okay I didn't know if you all had something else to share with the rest of the class? No. We'll wait till later. All right. Well, thank you all. Thanks. All right. Do we have any public comment? Okay. All right. Bring it back to committee. Yeah, sure. Madam Chair, I'll move for recommendation approval plan MJDP 24-65 Springhurst subdivision with the now revised 18 conditions. Okay. Is it removed and second? All in favor? Aye. Inanimous. Okay. Moving along. All right. Okay. We have a couple on the last page on the continued discussion items. The first one, the letter B under development plans, MJDP 2437 North Parkway Acres. You should have a copy of revised conditions for you to review. Okay. This property is located out off of North Broadway. It's been in quite a long time ago, showing development in this area, and then having a circle drive to come around to connect over to where the Waffle House is out there. This property here has a large sinkhole that is why it's been postponed, because they were supposed to submit revised geotech reports or update the geotech reports to the Division of Engineering. And so they submitted us a revised plan. We still had the same sign-off conditions as we had before, still had some cleanup conditions, location of street cross section, addition of conditional zoning restrictions, and delete note number 17. When this property went through with zone change a while back, it had conditional zoning restrictions. Addition of dimensions for buildings, addition of revised site statistics box, remove required parking and only depict proposed parking in the site statistics, We move extraneous lines across the site. Not quite sure these lines here, they're not property boundaries because the property circles around here and comes through. So we're not quite sure where those lines are, what they are for. And when this property came in, was rezoned, I'm going to goof this word up. discussed building fenestration and articulation along North Broadway, meaning the elevations of how they look towards the North Broadway. At this time, we have not received anything to show what the buildings are going to look like, how they're going to be presented towards North Broadway. So with that, I'll leave it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions. Any questions for staff? Okay, thank you. Applicant. Hi, I'm Mary Domigan with Geisler Domigan Engineers. Many of you guys already know. We were here a couple months ago, and there were a lot of questions about the sinkhole sinkhole that the latest that you all were seeing was about a study that was done I guess in 2016. It's been that long. So you know me and Vaughn have met and a geotech has also met with Vaughn you know over the last month. One of the things that I've done, I'm not a geotech, is place a stormwater detention system at the corner of the site, close to Paris Pike, just adjacent to the Speedway. And we have eliminated one of the buildings. There was originally three buildings there, and we've literally shifted the very last building to be with that to where there's only two now instead of three. And it still has the tower that you guys had recommended a couple years ago when the preliminary development plan went through. And I'm trying to think what else. As a result of that, to make sure that we had enough room for the detention, and also it just kind of made a little bit more sense to have the parking to go closer to the buildings, But the entrance off of, I'm not sure the name of the road that Speedway is off of, but that road right there, we just kind of flipped it, the entrance. It just made more sense. But I'll let you guys take discretion of that. But other than that, there have been no changes to it. And hopefully that is more to what you all are hoping for or would like to see happen. So where are the three buildings you were talking about? Are they on that? There were three buildings. Now there's just two. There it is. I can't tell what I'm looking at. Yep. Yes. Yep, that was building E and now it's building B. Because the A, B, and C right here, we got rid of the B in between and the A got shipped We'll need the microphone. into the stormwater detention to be 200 feet away from the sinkhole. Okay. Thank you. You look like that. Yeah, okay. I can see it. Okay. Yeah, I guess I'll... Yeah, I'm not quite sure what exactly it is, but we'll get a next step for you. I guess what I'm referring to is that this drive here was originally a little bit more down. I just clicked it to where the parking that was originally at the top is now further up to allow for the stormwater detention. Plus the parking can be closer to the buildings now. Like I said, it just kind of made more sense to do it that way. So, and also we adjusted the walkways to where, you know, you can clearly see that it goes from one side to the other to connect. And do you all have any questions or? Just a recommendation. Some of us are a little more visually challenged than others. and when you present it to the full planning commission it would be helpful if you had renderings to show us what this is going to look like. Absolutely. And I will also reach out to the owner today and see if there are any architectural drawings to kind of give you all an idea of kind of what the buildings are going to look like as well. That would be great. Okay. Any additional questions? All right. Thank you. Thank you. okay you can go ahead and have a seat madam chair I move for approval of PLNM JDP 2437 North Parkway acres with the revised 19 conditions. Okay. We got a second. All in favor. Unanimous. Okay. Paula, you got to, like, we need to have a signal. So she says move on to the next beautiful picture that shows some of what's going on in the area. Okay, so yeah, we need to have a signal. Okay, so moving down on the postponed list, the next item on the list, item C, did submit a revision, and that's the Givens property. And just for everybody, the Givens property is... I'm sure it has a new name. Brandon, do you know their new commercial marketing name? Okay, so it's a shopping center at the southeast corner of Citation and Georgetown. So we have Georgetown along the top here. Oh, Citation, you're right. Citation along the top and then Georgetown along the west side of the property. They also have access to citation via Remington Way, which is a collector street here. They enter here. I'm going to move up because I know we have a little. So the Givens property has been under development now for probably a year, year and a half in terms of moving forward. We have a Publix shopping grocery store in the rear. And then we've had several outlots be approved and included on now this larger development plan. So a bank, a car wash, Valvoline, a couple other, a restaurant, a dentist, yeah. So within that, and again, we are moving closer towards the corner of Citation and Georgetown with this particular outlot. and it is out lot five and they are proposing a city barbecue which is the barbecue place the Judy loves yeah yeah it so proposed is a restaurant with vehicular circulation around the restaurant so the access easement that serves the shopping center enter circle around the building and then back out there is also connections to the two adjoining lots in the front along Citation Boulevard so what remains an issue although they've cleaned up quite a bit of the changes or the conditions that we had previously we're still at 33 so we had some things that got cleaned up but we also have a few things that we needed to add one of the things that we try to do as these outlaws come in is include the other approved plans so that the newest plan includes all of the already approved outlaws so we have two more that have been approved adjacent and are in the process that need to get updated on this particular plan and then we have some cleanup conditions about date of the Planning Commission certification or the hearing date dimensioning the existing buildings that are already approved on other parts of the plan denoting the height of their building clarifying their statistics and that relates to FAR as well as lock coverage and the vehicular use areas they need to denote the required landscape island separating the drive-through lane that's not on there yet so they've shown just pavement and it's labeled as asphalt paving with a you know this is painted on which is not doesn't meet our ordinance that has to be a landscape landscaped island with curbing to delineate the drive-through lanes but the new conditions then go on to we don't have any cross sections on the on the plan at all and they need to be shown on the face of the plan so again we don't know the cross sections for citation remington and georgetown they need to remove the proposed restaurant sign we don't we don't include that on our development plans they need to dimension the egress drive lanes and parking spaces increase their tech size on a few of the areas it's not evident here but other out lots you can't read it and addition of the zoning information on all the adjacent properties the contours are shown but there's no labels so we don't know the the height land height they need to correct their plan type to an amended final development plan and then they do need to clarify lock coverage in the site statistics box it says it's a minimum of 0.3 or sorry it says max 0.3 but it's the new requirement is a minimum of 0.3 and that's down here in the bottom and then the last item carries forward from our previous conversation which is discuss compliance with the new B3 zone requirement for a minimum lock coverage of 30% so this is one of our developments that's been in process that has now run into this new regulation that they aren't meeting so I do think it would be beneficial potentially to meet with the applicant and discuss that further I don't think they've attended any of our meetings so far the engineer oh he's here okay and just talk about about what the options are in terms of meeting the 30% lot coverage here for instance patios can count covered patios can count towards your lot coverage and shared parking can help reduce the demand for your land to be just pavement so the staff is continuing to recommend postponement of this because of the really the threshold issue of not meeting the 30% coverage so we have any other questions for staff and so the applicant is here yes he did not he wasn't here last month Hello, my name is Jeff Launtreur. I'm with CESO, representative for City Barbecue. As mentioned, it is a fast casual barbecue restaurant. There's a patio. The building is shown. They do have a few smokers. Thank you. Smokers are a sign of their craft. Drive circulation is noted, sort of one way around kind of the right side to the west side. there, the left side, excuse me, there is two-way kind of upon entry and at the rear of the building, as well as along the top for cross-circulation amongst the adjacent tenants and future developments. I think we did, yeah, as noted, we did work through some of the items. There's some new items that we'll work through for sure. I know that the B3 lot coverage issue, we'll call it, that's sort of out of my hands in a way. I think the developer, the property owner is having conversations with his attorney and I think the city attorney. doing just some quick math for that it would require essentially a 12,000 square foot building to meet that and our proposed building is about 3,500 square feet so there's an issue there the project would probably go away if there isn't some sort of resolution that is above my prairie grade, we'll just say. But obviously up until that point, we'll continue working with staff to address the other comments in hopes that some resolution would come to terms with. Aside from that, happy to answer any questions. Where are you showing the patio on there? It's essentially on the top side of the building. it's kind of the hatched little hatched area rectangle above the dark bolding I'm sorry dark bold building line below the drive through so it's not mentioned with the label it looks like which is probably part of the issue but we can clarify that as well it doesn't sound like that would yeah really really big okay thank you so much all right thank you any public comment all right all right madam chair I move for a postponement appealing MJDP 2446 given property lot 5 city barbecue and the attached 33 conditions so second all right motion and second all in favor Okay, last one. We handed out a yellow sheet to you for this particular application, and that is because when they come back, if they're not listed on the agenda, we usually have a revision for you. The applicant did revise their plan, but it didn't really address the one issue well, and I'm not sure that that's their fault. but not the helipad yes so so just a refresher on where we are this is the collins orwell and wiggins property also known as the don franklin auto mall previously glenn auto mall so we have richmond road along the north edge of their plan service road eagle creek to the left side and then service road that runs through their property that does connect over here to squires road so we have a brand new hyundai building that's built brand new genesis building that's built and then these other two buildings that are i guess one was demolished two maybe two buildings were demolished to build a new nissan and gmac buildings but what's at what's here for revision today is an addition in the back for a car wash and to revise parking and then dumpster location but what was noted do we have a zoom in no what was noted on the plan is what drew attention is that this area open area with what looks kind of like a little lollipop in it was denoted as a helipad and when we looked at the zoning ordinance helipads helistops helicopter landing pads are not not listed in the b3 zone and so that brought some attention for the staff we have found that it is listed in other zones specifically either as a principal use or a conditional use and then we know that the code of ordinance sort of ties into that as well but the code of ordinance refers back to the zoning ordinance in terms of meeting the zoning ordinance regulations so I think we need more information from the applicant how they if they have permits from someone that allows the helipad so that we can try to work through that issue as of right now we we don't know how it got there and I don't think the zone in ordinance explicitly allows it that that's where we discussed but I discussed it with the law department yesterday so that's where we currently are All right, do we have any questions for staff? All right. So again, we don't have any issue with the car wash or the revised parking or the dumpster location, which was the purpose of the amendment. But we still have some questions about the helipad. No water quality, water issues with the car wash? Everything okay? Yeah, it'll get connected to the sewer system and the water. either get recycled within the system itself or go through the sanitary sewer cleaning process did you change the GMC building well that was a purpose of the amendment Tom retired last week. So tell us what we need to know. Yeah, I'm all here. Well, let's, I guess. The very last building, the one that hasn't been redesigned yet, Far, top button is my light. All right. Right there. This one and this little area around it is new. This was saving the day for all of the updated zone changes. We were filed before a lot of the B3 restrictions, so we added this to it. and that was how we were told this was all gonna go through and Tom didn't share any of that with you guys which is why there's no new comments and so I'm at a loss as to what I'm doing and our review was focused on the area yeah we didn't change anything over there with the helipad I was just gonna take the words off it was concrete circle because before I filed this it was a concrete circle I didn't know what it was as functioning as whatever it was I thought it was a good idea just not to label the concrete circle yeah so I imagine we'll have some further discussions with planning here shortly and we will try to get ourselves on track for next Thursday's hearing very good coverage there so question for staff given that you don't know what's happening in that building or anything about it are we still moving forward or you want to post phone good you there so they have an active final development plan whereas the givens property there it's their first development plan for that lot so they are are you getting larger your building's getting larger i believe it has i would have to go back and check um it's the car dealerships you have the brand who tells and it's it's been a bit of a struggle out there it's complicated it is yeah that's why we're doing this in steps and you've seen us here several times now trying to work this through okay i mean generally just looking at it they don't have an excessive amount of parking in the front of the building, right? So that would meet Article 16. Your landscaping would come in on those islands, which it looks like those have been depicted. Yeah, the areas that we did affect, we added islands, and we made sure we only had the 90 feet between them, and that was between this building and the Nissan, which is approved underway. The stuff out front next to Richmond Road doesn't change. the access easement that continues doesn't change. I'm guessing their lot coverage doesn't meet 30% either, but they've obviously been in existence for a long time. So our hope is that you will increase your lot coverage over time. You know, across the whole city, right? The B3 zones will be able to be utilized in a more efficient way. Individual property owners may never choose to, right? They'll just keep what works for them. And if I had to guess, I think they wouldn't want to put a new building or anything that blocks viewing their signature buildings for the individual cars. That is a general? Yeah. So I'm guessing there'd be no out lot development or anything in this particular case. They do have a large parking lot over here on Squires that they could, you know, fill into. Yeah. Yeah. Let me ask this one question. As you were talking with the other people, when I have an amendment to an area, I've got a lot, or a phase three amendment statistics is set up so that it's clearly what I'm doing on this section. Now that the overall zoning rules have changed so much, I've been leaving my statistics for the rest of the property listed as was approved at the time. so there you know i've got parking minimums which no longer happen i've got i don't have parking i don't have the floor area maximums which is i want to make sure that i'm doing that correctly everything that's approved under one set of ordinance should be listed that way and only what i'm changing is listed new i'll spread across and go through all the different parcels The new site statistics box allows you to fill in what you have on the plan so that as they come in and amend that area, then you'll amend the statistics to meet what is required today. So you can fill it in with a little dash or an asterisk or something that says not applicable. Since 2024 or something like that. Okay. Just cleaning up, I needed that. Let you guys weigh in on what you want to see. All right. So we're good to go with the staff recommendation. I want to ask a couple of questions about the way it's worded. Rory, this is not for you. This is for staff. The note at the top, are we adding to that and an additional building? we will have to update that for the for the commission which we'll do that then we'll again this was just a copy of the previous conditions we didn't change anything so we'll review the new building and then do a different color you know and change the dates at the bottom right yeah right yeah and this was again we just photocopied this on a different color so it was last we're blaming everything on Tom because he retired so even though this is subject to those changes we can move ahead with approval on these 13 conditions what I think you the committee probably already recommended approval previously yeah yeah that time you said I couldn't have the the the helipad and everything stopped for a while until we worked out that it's existing. So what do we need to do here? So you can vote again to recommend approval or you can just let it stand and we'll talk about it. We'll have a full presentation next week. Let it stand. Okay. Yeah. You need a motion for that? Okay, good. Okay. All right. I didn't want to be accused of approving. I've actually got to leave. We're done. Alright, okay. Okay. Thank you, David. Real quick, we did receive, as some of y'all were invited, a zoning ordinance text amendment to modify the ED zone. So wanted to give you all a very, very quick, very, very high level look at that. We'll discuss it more at zoning committee, but essentially the applicant is Hamburg East, and they're seeking to make several changes to the ED zone, essentially expand the uses, allow more residential, change the amount of open space to decrease what they would be required, expand what can be considered open space. So a large number of changes to the economic development zone, which is really intended sort of as the jobs-producing facet of the 96 EAMP. So staff is going to be recommending postponement this afternoon We would like more time to look at it and would like the applicant to provide some more justification So they're proposing a whole host of changes. I won't bore them, you know, worry all with those at this this time But staff is going to be recommending postponement Brandon Gross is is the attorney representing that so if you've got any quick questions for him Otherwise, we'll dig into this a little bit more detail later on this afternoon And then when we all look at it at the Planning Commission level thank you okay is that everything alright this meeting is adjourned Thank you. This is Councilmember James Brown with another Council Comment. We're in Veterans Park where there are several memorials out here that recognize the individuals who have served our country. Today we're going to talk about our veterans and some of the work that some veterans in our community have done to make Lexington a better place that celebrates and recognizes our veterans. And through some of that work there have been some good outcomes, the Veteran Commission being one of them, the Week of Valor, the reinstitution of the Veterans Parade, and then also Kentucky becoming home to the Kentucky Veterans Hall of Fame.